The Engagement and Information Improvement Report

Engagement and Information Improvement Report

Ian Cope,

CHIEF STATISTICIAN AND DIRECTOR OF STATISTICS AND ANALYTICS

Dirk Danino-Forsyth,

DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS

R.163/2022

OCT 2022

FOREWORD

Deputy Lucy Stephenson

Assistant Chief Minister for Communications,

Good communication by Government, both internally and externally, is in all of our interests. Not only does it ensure Islanders know how public money is being spent and how decisions are being taken in their name, but it ensures the Government can be held to account, facilitates discussion, drives improvements and ensures that people are informed and able to influence policy at all levels. It touches on every department and portfolio.

Voters made it clear during the election campaign that they wanted greater transparency, accessibility and accountability and now it's time for us to deliver that. A vital part of that process will come down to how we as a Government communicate and an important part of how we can improve our communications begins with this report.

It describes current practice with the information Government makes public and how, identifies examples of good communication as well as areas for improvement and proposes a series of actions.

Many of these proposed actions can be implemented within existing resources or at low cost, but some would require resourcing. Further work will be undertaken in the next few months to consider those potential costs and allow ministers to decide on priority actions. We will aim to have that information by March.

This does not mean, however, that making improvements to the way we communicate should wait. On the contrary, this report has refocused minds on the need to provide clear, quality and relevant information in a timely manner. And it serves as an important reminder of the need to ensure that the information provided by Government is as accessible as it can be to all in our community. We can work to those principles immediately.

I am grateful to all who have contributed to this project so far, and to the Chief Minister for placing her trust in me to oversee it on her behalf. It is a privilege to be part of a team working towards reconnecting Government with Islanders in a meaningful way.

1 - Introduction

Engagement between the Government of Jersey and Islanders includes many elements. As the Government acts as both the local provider of services and the national executive, this can range from face-to-face meetings about benefits to accessing information on gov.je about population levels.

In line with the new Council of Ministers 100 Day plan, this review considers all elements of communications and engagement, identifies good practice and areas for improvement, and suggests possible actions.  

All communications and engagement between Government and public relies on factual information, including statistics. The effective provision of information needs to make sure that it:

• Is accessible to all Islanders, including children and young people, older persons, minority and less heard groups

• Enables Islanders to understand the rationale for Government decisions.

Accessibility must not only include the provision of information in the language and format that suits these audiences, but it must also comply with technical standards of website accessibility that are important for disabled Islanders.

Islanders will rightly expect that their government presents information in formats that are culturally sensitive to Jersey and its heritage. Islanders do not want to see their government look and operate like those of the U.K., France, or Madeira.

This can best be done by having a cross-Government understanding and appreciation of the communication of information, and its importance as a lever of policy development, implementation, and evaluation.

2 - Summary of Proposed Actions

3 - Sufficiency and Presentation of Government Decisions

Introduction

For Government to be held effectively to account for the decisions it makes, information about those decisions must be open and accessible to all. This includes publishing both the decisions which Government makes and the information on which those decisions have been based.

Current Approach

Ministerial Decisions (MDs) are published in a dedicated area of gov.je. Each MD includes a summary of the decision which a Minister has made and is accompanied by a report setting out the rationale for the decision. In some cases, these reports are not published if the report contains information which is absolutely exempt' or qualified exempt' from publication under Part 4 or Part 5 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011.

The fact that an MD has been made is often publicised to the media by a press release. This would usually include a quote from the Minister who made the decision, providing further context and an explanation for the decision.

MDs and Council of Ministers minutes provide information on the key decisions which Government makes. Further information on ongoing Government policy initiatives can be found from a variety of sources, including:

• The Government's Common Strategic Policy

• The Government's annual Government Plan

• Reports provided to the States Assembly and published on the States Assembly website

• Ministers' responses to States members questions

• Responses to requests for information under the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011, which are published on the Government's website

• Government responses to feedback it has received to formal public consultations on particular issues, which are published on the Government's website

• Press releases which are carried both on the Government's website and in the local

media.

Areas for Improvement

Ministerial Decisions

It may not be clear immediately to Islanders either what MDs are or where they may be found when they visit gov.je. Those who are actively seeking MDs and who understand how the Government's decisions are recorded (including Government officials and the media) may find them by searching for the term. However, for those Islanders who have no prior knowledge of what MDs are, what they are called and where they may be found, there is no simple explanation provided and it may be challenging to navigate through gov.je to locate them.

Reports accompanying MDs may not be published, usually if the report relates to the formulation or development of any proposed policy by a public authority, under Article 35 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 (although other exemptions may be applied to protect commercial confidentiality, or for sensitive personal information). Article 35 is a broad exemption, and it is employed reasonably commonly as reason, for example, not to publish law drafting instructions which are being issued to the Legislative Drafting Office to request new legislation. There may be cases when it is appropriate to employ this exemption, but to accord with the Government's principles of openness, transparency and accountability, wherever possible, and while upholding our responsibilities to protect information, the use of exemptions should be appropriately limited.

Council of Ministers (CoM) Minutes

The minutes of CoM meetings are recorded by the States Greffe. They are separated into two parts: part A minutes are published, and part B minutes are confidential.

While discussions at the Council of Ministers are generally confidential to support frank and effective debate, wherever practical a record should be maintained in the publicly available A' agenda minutes to increase the volume of publicly available information.

Information on Policy under Development

A significant amount of information is released into the public domain every year by Government across all areas of policy. However, this information is published across a range of sources (such as reports to the States Assembly and responses to Freedom of Information requests, as set out above) and there is no single repository for all of the key documents which relate to policies which the Government is developing. Indeed, the Government does not store every report it publishes on gov.je – many of its key reports can only be found on the States Assembly's website. For example, the previous Council of Ministers' Common Population Policy has only been published on the States Assembly's website (p.116-2021.pdf (gov.je)) and cannot be found on gov.je.

Some key Government policies have a dedicated web page on gov.je, where documents are published, including reports. For example, the Climate emergency (gov.je) page of the website provides a single repository of policy documents, alongside information and relevant public announcements relating to climate change. The collation of information in this way on all areas of Government policy under development would assist Islanders to understand the work which the Government is doing.

Similarly, limited information is provided to update the public on how ongoing projects are delivering on the key objectives under its Common Strategic Policy (CSP) and Government Plan. The CSP is published at the start of each new Council of Ministers' term of office, while the Government Plan is published annually. The States Assembly provides ongoing scrutiny of the Government's workplans to achieve the objectives articulated in these plans, and the Government provides reports and information to the Assembly to enable it to do so effectively. However, Government could be more transparent by collating information on its work to address key strategic priorities on gov.je and keeping this up to date.

In addition, the Government is establishing Ministerial Groups, which act as sub-Committees of the Council of Ministers, providing an in-depth forum for policy discussion and the oversight of delivery. These Ministerial Groups should adopt a similar approach (A' and B' minutes) to the Council of Minsters wherever practical, and this should include ensuring the public are made aware of their work.

Finally, this information is currently only available online. It would be of benefit to Islanders who do not have access to a computer, or who may struggle to access a computer, if key policy documents were made available in hard copy.

Commitment to Publish Information

The Government is legally obliged to publish certain information, such as its annual report, and voluntarily publishes information, such as policy proposals. Ministers also make commitments to the States Assembly to publish information in answers to questions, in debates and in statements. The States may also adopt propositions under the terms of which the Council of Ministers must produce information.

It is clearly important that the Government acts on all commitments it makes to publish information. An appropriate governance system should be in place to ensure that each commitment to publish information is recorded and that those commitments are delivered upon in a timely manner. Ministers commit to publish the details of ministerial travel expenses within 20 days of each trip.

Proposed Actions

Council of Ministers Minutes

A1 - The volume of publicly available Council of Ministers A minutes' should increase so that a fuller record of their discussions is in the public domain; and minutes should be published monthly and as soon as possible following approval (rather than annually or periodically as previous).

Ministerial Decisions

A2 - The Ministerial Decision page on gov.je should be updated to provide Islanders with a simple explanation of what MDs are and how they are made.

A2.1 - The aim should be to publish MDs within three days of when they are made.

A2.2 - There should be a presumption that reports accompanying Ministerial Decisions summaries should be published unless to do so would be prejudicial to the Island as a whole.

Policy Under Development

A3 - All key areas of Government policy should have a dedicated page on gov.je containing relevant information, policy documents and public announcements. These pages should be organised by area of ministerial accountability.

A3.1 - All significant reports produced by the Government in future should be published on gov.je. This applies to reports which have been provided to the States Assembly and which also appear on the Assembly's website.

A4 - There should be a facility to view policies which are part of the Government's Common Strategic Policy and/or Government Plan on gov.je so that Islanders can get an overview of progress on all CSP priorities. Ongoing work on key policy initiatives which fall under the CSP/Government Plan, should be documented and kept up to date on gov.je. This should include links from these overarching Government strategies to the relevant web page for key policy initiatives, which are simple to navigate.

A4.1 - The feasibility of producing hard copies of key Government policy documents and presenting these in a dedicated section of the Jersey Library should be explored.

Commitment to Publish Information

A5 - Once Ministers have committed to the States Assembly that information will be published, such an action should be added to a new internal log of commitments. This is particularly needed when Ministers agree to publish information in the future because it is not presently available. Ministers commit to publish the details of ministerial travel expenses within 20 days of each trip.

A6 - Information on Ministerial Groups supporting the development of policy, or the oversight of services, should be clearly available on gov.je, and a new web page should be created to support this.

4 - Sufficiency and Presentation of Government Policy Engagement

Introduction

Public engagement describes the practice of involving members of the public in the agenda- setting, decision-making, and policy-forming activities of institutions responsible for policy development. Effective engagement produces better solutions and increases trust in, and endorsement of, the decisions Government makes. Engagement' encompasses a myriad of activities which facilitate participation in policy development, including but not limited to formal Government consultations, all of which serve to create a dialogue between Government and the public it serves.

Public engagement is key to creating solutions that are robust and responsive to Jersey's needs. It allows Islanders to be involved in policy design and decision-making processes that affect or interest them, while also allowing policy makers to gather perspectives on a problem, test and refine ideas, develop more robust solutions and build legitimacy for contentious or complex decisions. This is not only good practice, but key to building trust with Islanders and delivering better outcomes. While decisions that arise from open and collaborative processes may be perceived as more credible, public engagement may also be considered as tokenistic and counterproductive if carried out ineffectively.

Current Practice

The Government of Jersey uses a range of methods to engage with Islanders on policy matters. This includes public communications (social media posts, posters, banners); surveys; focus groups[1]; workshops and, more recently, citizens' assemblies and citizens' juries. Examples of Government undertaking formal public consultations (that is, periods where Islanders are engaged to provide their feedback and input on a proposal or an issue that affects them) include the recent Bridging Island Plan, Mental Health Strategy and Putting Children First projects.

Most engagement takes the form of formal public consultations which are published online and are delivered by policy officers. The relevant head of communications also provides input to the design of the consultation process to ensure that information is presented appropriately. In most consultations, either initial or detailed proposals are published in a document on gov.je and feedback is sought from the public in a variety of ways, including via email, post, an online survey or in person at public events or stakeholder meetings. Internal good practice guidance, including a consultation Code of Practice, can be found on the Government of Jersey's Intranet.

The Government has a range of established forums and bodies through which feedback is sought and fed back to officials, including:

• Citizen's assemblies and juries e.g. Citizen's Jury on Assisted Dying and the Citizen's Assembly on Climate Change

• Youth Parliament

• Cluster groups (representing mental health; children and young people; older adults; learning disabilities; equality, diversity and inclusion; homelessness; cancer and social enterprise). These groups are comprised of practitioners and third sector representatives, with some input from service-users

• The newly established Older Persons Living Forum.

The Government has used citizens assemblies and juries to consider key, contentious, or challenging areas of Government policy and to recommend solutions. For the Jersey Assisted Dying Citizens' Jury and Citizens' Assembly on Climate Change, interested participants were selected via random stratified sampling. In total, 23 Islanders took part in the Citizen's Jury on Assisted Dying, which took place over 10 online sessions, while 45 took part in the Citizen's Assembly on Climate Change over 15 online sessions. The Care Inquiry Citizens' Panel allowed care survivors to not just be involved with, but to co-develop the Care Inquiry legacy project which led to the initiation of Jersey's annual Children's Day and other key initiatives to benefit children.

The Government also engages with citizens via a local network of third sector organisations, charities and forums. These partners assist Government in undertaking consultation activities by distributing surveys, facilitating focus groups and linking communities with relevant Government officials. Examples of these partners include:

• Jersey Library, Highlands College and Jersey Sport

• Community organisations and charities such as Recovery College, Salvation Army, Caritas, Mind, Shelter Trust, Autism Jersey, Friends of Africa, Liberate and Les Amis

• Community forums such as Care Ambassadors and the Care Survivors Network

• Professional forums such as the Motor Traders Association and Sustainable Finance

Group.

High-quality engagement captures the views of all sections of society. It should be inclusive and take proactive steps to reach less heard groups', including children and young people, older people, disabled people and ethnic minorities. Past engagement activity has captured the views of less heard groups successfully in the development of some Government policy, most notably in the development of children's policy.

For example, in her advice to Government ahead of the debate of the Children (Convention Rights) (Jersey) Law 2022, the then Children's Commissioner noted that,

"I am incredibly pleased that we are starting to hear the language of children's rights in the States Assembly. CRIAs are already being completed and are stimulating debates on children's rights issues."

Further, the Department of Customer and Local Services has established existing links with charities and stakeholder groups which cover the following themes:

• Children and young people

• Older persons

• Equality, diversity and inclusion

• Homelessness

• Adult mental health

• Learning disabilities

• Cancer

• Social enterprise.

Areas for Improvement

Consistency of Approach

Between June 2018 and April 2022, 114 consultations were published on gov.je across all areas of Government policy, but crucially there were marked differences in how these were undertaken:

• Some consultations asked for Islanders' views to be provided by a closed-question online survey, whereas others asked for long-form written views via email

• Some consultations invited any interested Islanders to present their views face-to- face in workshops or meetings, whereas others select representative samples and focus groups to illicit views

• Most consultations were published only in English

• Most consultations did not collect data to monitor the diversity of respondents.

Accessibility

As different means have been used to ascertain the views of Islanders across all consultations, there is no centrally held information on the level of engagement by Islanders across all Government consultations. Nonetheless it can be assumed that the views of those for whom English is a second language, those who do not access the internet and those who are not already politically engaged are, despite well intentioned effort, likely to be less heard. This is likely to mean that, in general, feedback provided does not reflect a broad range of views from across society.

Government sometimes translates information and communication materials into other languages; the choice of language(s) should be informed by evidence. Unlike the Census in England and Wales, the Jersey Census does not ask questions about main language, nor how well people speak English, so there is no definitive information on languages spoken in Jersey, nor proficiency in English. The available data, which is presented in Annex C, would indicate that Portuguese is the second most widely spoken language in Jersey and that a proportion of Portuguese speakers do not speak English. Consideration should, therefore, be given to translating consultation documents into at least Portuguese to engage all communities more effectively. Translations into other languages may be appropriate for specific consultations.

Diversity

The Government currently does not undertake diversity monitoring systematically across all engagement activities which it undertakes. Diversity monitoring is a tool for the Government to analyse the use and experience of service delivery by different groups of people and, where necessary, to take appropriate action to improve those services and/or policies. Diversity characteristics should be collected as part of responses to surveys and consultations. Analysing diversity data can reveal:

• Whether services are being used by a particular group

• If there are any different needs that are pertinent to a particular demographic group

• Under or overuse of a service by a particular community

• Discrimination

• Evidence that services are not discriminatory

• The effectiveness of services and/or policies

• How policies and/or services should be changed or renewed.

To monitor diversity, the Government would collect information on some or all of the protected characteristics under the Discrimination (Jersey) Law 2013. These include age, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, and gender identity. This could be done by asking people to answer questions based on individual self-identification using questions aligned to the census. Information would be collected on a voluntary basis as it is accepted that some people would not wish to share this information. It would be important to explain the value of sharing diversity information to ensure Government is not missing the views of sectors of the community. It will also be important to assure respondents about the privacy and confidentiality of their responses – such as allowing anonymous responses.

The introduction of standard monitoring across Government engagement activity would help identify any gaps in community engagement and could help ensure that future engagement targets all communities through proactive approaches.

Observing Public Opinion

Having compared Jersey's current practice with best practice in other jurisdictions (see Annex B) an identified gap is polling (i.e. the continuous monitoring of public opinion through mass surveying). Polling would assist Government in understanding public opinion on a broad range of issues in a timely fashion, in turn allowing Government to assess its priorities and how policies might be received. Polling can be undertaken in a several ways, including:

• Outsourcing data collection and analysis to a private polling service

• Combined public/private polling (e.g. data collection is handled externally, while the analysis is handled internally)

• A polling function which is "in-house" to the Government.

The drawbacks of polling include cost and data becoming quickly outdated. Other factors for consideration are:

• Frequency of polls

• How data is collected (via phone, email, online or in-person contact)

• Random sampling (which would be more representative, but likely more costly and therefore less frequent) vs. the polling of a panel (which can be done more frequently and cost-effectively, but with less representative results)

• Outsourcing to a private polling service or establishing an in-house polling function

• Ensuring the reliability of data.

That the Government does not undertake polling is a diagnosed deficiency in Jersey's current approach to engagement. Effective and timely polling activity would provide the Government with greater understanding of the issues which matter most to Islanders.

As part of a Covid Health Recovery project two qualitative researchers will undertake data projects until the end of 2023 to provide health intelligence within the Public Health team. If successful, their remit could be expanded into other policy areas, providing policy officers with in-house qualitative researchers to carry out focus groups, interviews, workshops and other forms of engagement/qualitative research. Sustaining and expanding funding for in- house qualitative research may help to address deficiencies in understanding public opinion and realise long-term benefits for policy development.

Deliberative Bodies

A Public Account Committee's (PAC) 2022 report (Jersey: PAC report 14/2/22P.A.C.1/2022) recommended the continued use of Citizens' Panels, Assemblies and Juries, concluding that they had been valuable in assisting Government decisions' in Jersey. However, it also identified scope for improvement. Recommendations included:

• "That the Government of Jersey commits to additional learning to develop internal exercise to improve value-for-money when seeking to establish future deliberative bodies. This will also allow Islanders to engage with and learn about deliberative processes in greater detail"

• "That the Government of Jersey develops a policy toolkit to aid Ministers in understanding the establishment and operation of deliberative bodies, and to help identify the most suitable form of deliberative body to use for each respective policy issue, and to develop additional processes to guarantee institutional listening in respect of the outcomes of each deliberative body"

• "That the Assisted Dying Citizens' Jury should be used as a model of best practice when establishing future deliberative bodies."

Research Ethics Principles

Effective implementation of research ethics ensures that participants and researcher(s) are protected from harm, including a focus on risk management for issues including potential data protection liability. The goal is not to eliminate risks but rather to minimise them and ensure that it is ethical to carry out any proposed research, bearing in mind its potential benefits and risks. Research ethics panels can be used to embed ethical principles in research projects. They can also carry out training on research ethics to those who propose to carry out relevant research.

The Government of Jersey already has one research ethics panel: an Ethics Committee, created in 2006, advises the Minister for Health and Social Services. It performs several functions, one of which is to consider specific issues relating to clinical research proposals. Its constitution and terms of reference are a matter of public record. However, the principles by which it determines whether a research proposal is ethically acceptable do not appear to be publicly available. Research ethics committees are not widely used across the rest of Government

It is important to consider:

1. Which Government departments require access to a research ethics committee
2. How such committees should operate as a matter of procedure (for example, membership and selection methods, how many panel members should consider an application, whether low risk research would need approval from the panel, the timeframe for consideration of an application, the appeal process for applicants who are dissatisfied with a decision, how to investigate a suspected breach of the research ethics rules and what sanctions to apply in a relevant case)
3. The principles that research ethics committees should use to determine whether to approve or reject an application
4. Who will be responsible for providing training on ethics and on the research ethics application system and how this training will be undertaken.

Tried-and-tested models for (1)-(4) are available from the higher education sector. The key ethical values included, regardless of jurisdiction, are Veracity/Integrity; Privacy including Dignity and Autonomy; Confidentiality including Data Protection; and Accuracy. Informed consent and transparency/openness are also required in most contexts. Reference in policy terms is also generally made to Beneficence, Non-maleficence and Justice.

Proposed Actions

Consistency of Approach

A7 - The Government should adopt a more cohesive, structured approach to engagement to ensure that it engages more effectively with the public to develop policy solutions which are more responsive to Islanders' concerns. It is recommended that this is called the Policy Inclusion Framework which should include guidance on:

• Scope – clear internal and external guidance on when and how to involve Islanders in the development of policy

• Structure - who to involve from within those groups, the establishment of standing groups such as the Old Person's Living Forum and the development of criteria for whether to set up standing groups in the future

• Processes –a consistent set of methodologies that are easy to understand and to implement

• Products - the use of simple, short documents written in plain English; and when it would be appropriate to use non-English languages, as well as products for people with disabilities.

Accessibility

A8 - The Policy Inclusion Framework should include guidance on the structured participation and inclusion of various groups in policy development processes across the Government, including:

• Children and young people

• Older people

• Other less heard groups, including Islanders with disabilities, ethnic minorities and individuals for whom English is a second language.

Diversity

A9 - Robust diversity monitoring should be introduced as standard across all Government engagement exercises.

Observing Public Opinion

A10 - A structured centralised approach to observing public opinion should be implemented to provide Ministers with information about current issues that matter most to Islanders.

A10.1 - Explore the potential to mainstream, beyond 2023, the qualitative researchers working on Covid Health Recovery to improve how qualitative information is collected and shared across Government teams.

A10.2 - Explore the costs of outsourcing polling to a private polling service for conducting regular Island-wide polling.

Deliberative Bodies

A11 - The Policy Inclusion Framework should include a toolkit to aid Ministers and officials to help identify the most suitable form of deliberative body to use for each respective policy issue.

A12 - The number of standing public fora, such as an Older Persons Living Forum, which are representative of Jersey's communities should be increased. This will help ensure that communities are included in Government decision-making, enabling them to have their say on matters that affect them and the Island as a whole. The purpose of these fora should be to identify common issues and improve engagement with lesser heard communities.

Research Ethics Principles

A13 - Research ethics principles should be included in the Policy Inclusion Framework guidance.

5 - Sufficiency and Presentation of Statistical Outputs of Government

Introduction

Statistics and data are produced and published in order to enable informed decision making by the States Assembly, Ministers, Government, businesses, charities and Islanders themselves. Transparent publication of such data allows for informed debate on aspects of Island life and Government policies. It also allows Islanders to hold Government to account for its performance. It is therefore important that such data is fit-for-purpose and accessible.

Jersey's Statistics System

The Statistics and Census (Jersey) Law 2018 sets the framework for Jersey's statistics system. Like many jurisdictions, Jersey has a decentralised statistics system, with the Chief Statistician and Statistics Jersey at its core.

Statistics Jersey produces a wide range of official statistics. In addition, there are statisticians and analysts in departments such as HCS, Public Health, CYPES, CLS, T&E and the States of Jersey Police. These teams also publish statistics, known as public authority statistics.

The Chief Statistician and Director of Analytics is responsible for:

• The production and publication of Official Statistics by Statistics Jersey, including responsibility for methods, standards, content, and timing

• The wider analytical function of Government, including professional and career development for statisticians and analysts in Government

• Publishing data to support the Jersey Performance Framework and the cross- departmental data in Jersey in Figures

• Implementation of the Code of Practice for Statistics across public authorities. The Code of Practice embeds good practice in the production of statistics and seeks to maximize the trustworthiness, quality, and value of all public authority statistics.

The role of Statistics Jersey, as Jersey's National Statistics Office, is to produce statistics about Jersey's economy, society and population for the public good', which includes providing statistical reports to assist with decision making by the States Assembly, Ministers, public authorities, businesses, charities, and Islanders themselves.

Statistics Jersey also has a role to co-ordinate data as effectively as possible, and to maximize the potential of data held by public authorities.

Current Practice for Reporting of Public Authority Statistics

• Statistics Jersey publish Official Statistics (as currently defined by the Statistics and Census (Jersey) Law 2018)

• In line with the Code of Practice for Statistics these are pre-announced a year in advance Publication release schedule (Statistics Jersey) (gov.je)

• The data relevant to official statistics are available in PDF bulletins, on Open Data, and in addition are presented with associated statistical narrative across the Jersey in Figures web pages

• Other public authorities publish statistics via Jersey in Figures, management information reports, and their own statistical releases.

A review has identified almost 700 measures/statistics published on the Government of Jersey website in the following three separate areas:

• Jersey in Figures web pages – which is a compendium of information collated from various parts of Government (including Statistics Jersey)

• Island Outcomes and Indicators – indicators of long-term trends for Jersey under three sustainable wellbeing categories - economy, environment, and community

• Service Performance Measures – quarterly departmental performance against in- year targets.

Good Practice

As the Jersey Code of Practice for Statistics[2] explains:

• Statistics producers should use appropriate ways to increase awareness of the statistics and data, communicate effectively with the widest possible audience, and support users and potential users in identifying relevant statistics to meet their needs

• Statistics, data and related guidance should be easily accessible to users

• Statistics and data should be released using accessible communication formats and methods which should work with the most commonly used assistive technologies

• Statistics should be accompanied by a clear description of the main statistical messages that explains the relevance and meaning of the statistics in a way that is not materially misleading. They should be illustrated by suitable data visualisations, including charts, maps and tables, where this helps aid appropriate interpretation of the statistics

• Comparisons that support the appropriate interpretation of the statistics, including within Jersey and internationally, should be provided where useful

• Users should be signposted to other related statistics and data sources and the extent of consistency and comparability with these sources should be explained to users

• Producers should commit to improve data presentation, enhance insight, and better meet the needs of different types of users and potential users in the dissemination of their statistics and data

• Statistics producers should make supplementary analyses available for reuse where practicable and consider the release of statistics and data that are the subject of regular queries during statistics planning.

Issues with Current Publication of Statistics and Data

Findability

Many statistics currently sit under a web page titled Government Performance' which is not easily accessible from the gov.je home page (Government performance).

They can be accessed through other means, for example Jersey in Figures can be accessed through www.gov.je/statistics where a search can bring you directly to the Jersey Performance Framework' or the Future Jersey' pages.

There is no single place for users to find data on particular topics, the user often needs to have an awareness of which department, or even which organisation, publishes the data to find it.

Example: Live births and deaths are reported on the www.statesassesmbly.gov.je – there is a link to the report on gov.je but the headline information is not easy to access without knowing where to search.

Similar information is currently spread across many locations, with limited signposting to enable readers to understand the extent of related information readily available on particular topics.

Example: Information on GCSE and equivalent results can currently be found in the service performance measures, as an Island Outcome, and with detailed breakdowns and information as part of a regular report from the Children, Young People, Education and Skills department.

There is considerable duplication of information – multiple places to update, and/or risk of mis-matching information in different parts of the website.

Example: Weekly bus passenger figures can be found as part of Service Performance measures, and amongst the Jersey in Figures pages on transport'.

There is no single page for users to browse for statistical publications, to be able to see the most recent releases, and to be informed about when to expect upcoming releases. Pre- announcing dates of statistical publications improves trust in their release. The Jersey Code of Practice for Statistics includes that the "release of both regular and ad hoc statistics should be pre-announced, giving a specific release date at least four weeks in advance where practicable"[3]. At present only Statistics Jersey and Public Health have such release schedules.

Useability

There are a range of different formats and presentations used in different areas of the website, with different underlying technology used.

Example: Open Data and SharePoint lists both being used as source of truth'; and embedded Power BI, C3 charts, bespoke HTML tables being used to visualise data.

The Service Performance data doesn't allow quick interpretation of trends over time, nor do they consistently enable comparison with benchmarks or other jurisdictions. The Island Outcome Indicators are not presented in a way to enable evaluation of whether a particular datapoint is a good' example.

Example: Island Outcomes Indicator - number of live births – what is good'?

Or, to enable evaluation of which of the high-level areas are more positive than others. Example: What is Jersey being most successful in achieving in terms of its goals – community, the economy or the environment?

Relevance

Of the current 223 departmental service performance measures, an initial review suggests that 80-100 are internal management indicators, but unlikely to be of interest to the general public.

Example: Service performance measure – % IT incident resolution – an important internal management indicator but not necessarily helpful for Islanders.

Some outcome indicators are not necessarily indicative of success in the outcome and would benefit from review by subject matter experts to increase the relevance of some of the indicators to the outcome.

Proposed Actions

Findability

A14 – Statistics and data should be findable in a single location on gov.je. Consider redesigning the existing statistics/data web pages so that there is a clear path from the home page of gov.je to Statistics and data'. Under Statistics and data a full range of data and statistics should be available, regardless of public authority producer.

A15 - Consider implementing the following paths to finding statistics/data:

• A single-stop shop' master publication schedule for public authorities, which can be filtered by the department/division, showing both published reports and release dates for future reports

• Thematically based - for example community, environment, economy as top headings. Under each should be further subheadings, and links to relevant contributing departmental pages, visualisation of relevant Island Outcome Indicators, relevant service performance measures, and relevant contextual data.

• By department - to include:

• Their service performance measures
• A link to the master publication schedule
• Other contextual data such as charts and narrative.

Example: The Public Health department could have a link to the publication schedule automatically filtered to Public Health releases, a link to a list of their published reports, a link to/visualisation of their service performance measures, and links and/or embedded sections on various headline data that they produce such as numbers of live births.

Useability

A16 – Review the feasibility of introducing a consistent look and feel to Government data, including consistent software (for example, embedded Power-BI Charts and dashboards) to present chart information, and consistent storing of the underlying data so the data is stored once, in one place, but may be accessed in different locations.

A17 - Where time series exist, seek to store all data in a format allowing trends over time to be shown, and be presented as trends over time.

A18 – For all data, where good' and poor' thresholds exist, explore storing data in a format allowing their status to be shown, and to be presented in context with those thresholds.

A19 – Evaluate improving the visual presentation of the Island Outcome Indicators to maximise their accessibility, comparability over time and between sections, and to enable clear presentation of success or otherwise in each area.

Relevance

A20 – Conduct a review of departmental service performance measures to ensure that the published measures are relevant to Islanders and understandable. Any measures relating to internal management and not of wider interest to the public should be monitored at the team or departmental level.

A21 – Pilot a review of the relevance, comprehensiveness and comparability of each section of the Island Outcome Indicators, including work to identify what represents good' and poor' for each indicator.

A22 – Review the range of other statistics reported on gov.je pages to ensure they reflect a meaningful and comprehensive view of the community, economy, and environmental context in Jersey.

6 - How Information is Presented on Gov.je

Introduction

The majority of content on gov.je resides in a SharePoint Content Management System (CMS). This content is managed by a community of web editors across the organisation, these web editors are trained by the Modernisation & Digital (M&D) Web Services team[4].

The objectives of the Web Services team are to:

• Make online services available that are modern, easy-to-use, convenient and reliable

• Publish content that is findable, relevant, useful, accurate, current, concise, clear, accessible and easy to understand.

Current Practice

M&D has developed Government digital standards to make sure users have a positive digital experience. These ensure that published HTML content is discoverable, accessible, consistent and useful. Several standards and guidelines are used to ensure content is consistent and adopts best practice, which includes:

• Service manual

• Web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) 2.1

• Style guide

• Plain English

• Formatting guidelines

• Web editor training

• Content management system training

• Retention schedules

• Data protection.

GOJ departments determine the information they need to publish, and that content is often prepared by the subject matter experts within that department. The Web Services team advise on standards and how best to publish content.

Once a department is ready to publish information, they use an approval workflow to submit it for publication where it is checked for consistency against a style guide, checked for accessibility issues, HTML formatting errors, etc. and then published to gov.je.

Content is commonly supplied by departments as HTML (entered directly into the CMS by web editors) or uploaded as a document (usually PDF). Gov.je is approximately 33,000 pages in size, containing around 250,000 items (e.g. data in lists) and in the region of 10,000 documents. Gov.je is approximately 50GB in size with 30GB being documents.

The one.gov.je sub-domain contains most of our digital services, or forms, with 274 services available at the time of writing. Progress on the development and introduction of digital services is published monthly at Accessing services online (gov.je).

Content Strategy

The Web Services team focusses on four content specific priorities to align content more closely to the broader digital design principles applied in the development of digital systems.

1. Focus editorial efforts on customer needs to allow us to prioritise popular content; reduce the number of unused pages, documents and images; simplify existing content; and identify top tasks. This enables us to anticipate customers' intentions, and to channel relevant, useful content towards our customers. It also lessens the content management task.
2. Simplify and align web content to make copy more understandable, useful and usable; reduce word count; and introduce robust guidelines on brand, audience, messaging and tone of voice. This makes our content more accessible and easier to use across all devices, strengthens awareness and familiarity of the gov.je brand, and increases trust and customer satisfaction.
3. Consolidate content management to increase central oversight, direction and governance of all content, content types and channels; to reduce time spent in workflow; and to reduce margins for error. This helps define areas of responsibility, relieve the workload on the wider editorial community and ultimately increase the quality and usability of content produced.
4. Systematically review performance to identify trends; provide the evidential bases for long-term editorial planning; and analyse successes and failures. This enables us to devise recommendations on content and how and where time and effort needs to be focused.

We know our customers want information that is:

• Easy to find

• Easy to understand

• Easy to act on.

Our customers are task-driven and time-poor and they expect good, efficient service in return for their taxes.

These content priorities help ensure that we train our web contributors in the best way of meeting customer expectations with web content. It recommends processes, procedures and policies that ensure we consistently manage the web content lifecycle; and standards and requirements to make sure we get the highest return on (time and manpower) investment for the organisation.

Open Data

Open government data' is data held by Government that has been published online, in a machine-readable format, under a permissive licence. The licence grants anyone, worldwide, the perpetual right to copy, publish, distribute, transmit, adapt or otherwise exploit the data for any purpose, including commercial purposes, and to combine the data with other data or include it in a product or application.

The opening up of Government datasets contributes to:

1. Citizen engagement
2. Improved efficiency and operations of public services, for example through better decision making
3. Increased transparency and accountability.

Datasets can be found at https://opendata.gov.je/

The Web Services team launched the GOJ open data website in 2015. The software was used initially as a data repository with data owners uploading files and making those files, and the data within them, available to anyone.

Once the open data website was in use it became clear that data owners were often managing data in two places: gov.je's content management system (CMS) and within opendata.gov.je. To address this an application programming interface (API) was created using gov.je's native CMS. This meant that data could be managed in the same place (a single version of the truth') as part of their existing gov.je content but be outputted in three data formats to satisfy the need for both human and machine-readable formats. This allowed us to continue to list datasets in a directory format under licence but manage the data more efficiently.

This publishing approach is designed for small to medium sized datasets and is reusable. Examples of datasets that use this publishing process are included in Annex D.

Open Data - Data Publishing

Datasets need to be provided from those departments responsible for the data. They are responsible for the relevant governance and security surrounding that data, e.g. Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIA). There are usually business decisions to be made prior to any technical considerations. But if data is to be published, the following will be considered:

• Format

• Structure

• Cleansing

• Delivery mechanism

• Governance and security.

These elements are needed prior to data visualisation.

Open Data - Data Visualisation

Data visualisation, or communicating with data, is both a science and an art. It also takes time and resource so we encourage departments to include sufficient time in any plans or publication schedules they may have.

Small to medium sized datasets, usually static data updated periodically, can often be managed in-house. Simple outputs using JavaScript and Power-BI can then be used to include visuals on gov.je.

Not all data requires visualisation, e.g. a data journalist requesting a .CSV for fact-checking purposes requires a different output to an Islander browsing gov.je who may be looking for a storytelling' style of presentation.

Other data is visualised to improve communication with website users e.g. Coronavirus (COVID-19) data for Jersey (gov.je). Most users access the data via the visual interface where data is presented with contextual text. Few users require the data feeds directly, but these are also provided.

Larger and more complex datasets, or data that needs to be exposed from a relational database for example, may need to be updated dynamically. This is likely to require a greater range of resources to enable publishing. In this scenario, a department data owner engages with their M&D Business Enablement Manager (BEM) and approach the task of publishing that data as a managed task/small project if necessary (addressing any resourcing, budgeting, technical inputs, support processes, data lifecycles, testing phases, etc.). The BEMs will support the department in prioritising the task in the context of their department's wider set of business requirements and priorities.

Open Data - Use Gov.je for Storytelling

Statistic Jersey's 'Jersey in figures' pages on gov.je are an exemplar of how data can be used for effective storytelling. Their pages employ natural language, well-structured page layouts, tables and both static and custom interactive charts. Pages are specific to their topic as users are usually focussed on a single area of interest at one time and will return again if they require information on other topics.

Statistical data for Jersey (gov.je)

Departmental web editors creating gov.je web pages can bring their content to life and aid in better communication with users by using a range of tools whilst remembering that the largest group of users' access gov.je on their mobile phone.

Gov.je offers the following tools and features to help create stories with data:

• Text based on the gov.je CMS guide and style guide

• Hyperlinks to other relevant content

• HTML tables

• Charts and graphs

• Interactive elements, e.g. Environmental monitoring of Jersey's marinas and harbours (gov.je) and Jersey Cultural Diversity Map (gov.je).

The features above have been tested and render well on mobile devices and meet the required accessibility standards. Feedback should be sought from those who are unfamiliar with the content and data to see if it is easy to understand and interpret.

Domain Strategy

An important part of digital publishing is discovery; can users find what they are looking for easily? An ongoing challenge for the Government of Jersey is to minimise the number of new domains and sub-domains that are created and to focus resources and investment into gov.je.

Organisational policy sets out the criteria and procedures for creating new websites and domain names. This policy is the New websites and domain names policy (IS-POL-018) and is available on the Intranet. This policy is intended to help improve the quality of Government services, help Islanders find information online, and to reduce duplication and costs. This policy applies to all departments within the States of Jersey.

The general principle is that all government information, digital content and services will be published on www.gov.je by default as that is where users expect to find information. When new domains are created it becomes harder to users to discover content using tools like site search.

Accessibility - Standards and Tools

Gov.je aims to conform to the World Wide Web Consortium's (W3C's) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1.

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 covers a wide range of recommendations for making Web content more accessible. Following these guidelines will make content more accessible to a wider range of people with disabilities, including accommodations for blindness and low vision, deafness and hearing loss, limited movement, speech disabilities, photosensitivity, and combinations of these, and some accommodation for learning disabilities and cognitive limitations; but will not address every user need for people with these disabilities. These guidelines address accessibility of web content on desktops, laptops, tablets, and mobile devices. Following these guidelines will also often make Web content more usable to users in general.

The gov.je website accessibility statement also includes guidance around which assistive technologies are compatible.

Accessibility - Test and Audit

Accessibility testing is delivered using the following approaches:

• Manual accessibility testing

• Automated testing (often focussed on technical elements)

• User testing.

Gov.je is audited regularly using Sitemorse, who conduct an automated assessment and provide information on a daily, weekly, monthly and quarterly basis to the Web Services team.

Providing accessible content is the law in many countries. Sitemorse's accessibility tests are determined by the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 and assess how well digital content complies to the standard.

An accessibility audit for States of Jersey was carried out by the Digital Accessibility Centre (DAC) user/technical team on 9 February 2022. Gov.je was assessed against the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines WCAG 2.1. The audit report incorporates the findings on any accessibility barriers identified during the testing process. The issues reported are examples of any assistive technology barriers which were encountered during accessibility testing, along with information detailing how to resolve them.

For the website to be eligible for a Digital Accessibility Centre AA certification, and fall in line with WCAG 2.1 requirements, all A and AA issues must be resolved. Gov.je was assessed as:

* One or more issues that urgently need remediation. There will be a list of actions that the developers need to address to make sure that the product is functional for users of assistive technology.

The Digital Accessibility Centre assessment confirmed our regular audits - that in order to fundamentally improve the accessibility of gov.je there are technical challenges that will only be addressed by a change in technology. This will require replacement of SharePoint as the content management system.

Areas for Improvement

Use of the PDF Format on Gov.je

PDFs (portable document format) can be problematic for online reading when the appropriate navigation is not provided, they are not labelled appropriately and have insufficient colour contrast. PDFs are often large masses of text and images with the format often designed around paper sizes rather than screen sizes. PDFs can sometimes be unpleasant to read and cumbersome to navigate online.

PDFs are used by organisations for speed and convenience as its quicker to publish a PDF than prepare a professionally written web page with appropriate markup language. This neglects the needs of the end user who access content on mobile devices and therefore require it in HTML format for the best user experience.

PDFs are also much less likely to be reviewed and updated once published meaning that hyperlinks contained in these documents are rarely maintained. This then translates to a poorer audited score overall for gov.je as out of date links are the same as broken links. It is a poor user experience.

The most impactful improvement that could be made to gov.je in terms of openness and transparency would be to mandate, as policy, that content on gov.je should be HTML by default'. PDFs should only be used in addition to HTML content (e.g. for printing purposes such as a report) and only a small number of exemptions should be permitted.

There are several challenges to deliver and enforce such a change:

• Governance of application of web accessibility standards

• Department's ability to prioritise and resource a greater number of web editors

• Additional investment in document conversion software options

• Training resources to support web editors in creating HTML

• Governing the standards of the content submitted and ensuring the best quality of the PDFs that remain in use, especially for compliance with accessibility standards.

A Standardised Content Publishing and Delivery Process

Currently, web content can be sent to the web team at any point of a project. However it is often one of the last points in the publishing process which leaves insufficient time to ensure content meets Government of Jersey's digital content standards, or customer needs. A standard content publishing process set up for all of Government to follow would ensure content is prioritised and resourced efficiently and effectively. This would include:

• Strategy and infrastructure - user research and data, content strategy, best practice, accessibility, usability

• Content and business requirements - content drafting, developing requirements, technical

• Development - content, finalising requirements, scope, templates

• Structure - site map, architecture, taxonomy, user flow, wireframes, prototyping

• Testing - test website/app, scenarios, accessibility, usability

• Published - hard launch, soft release, indexing, search boosts

• Lifecycle - maintenance, review, reporting.

Proposed Actions

Presentation of Information

A23 – M&D should seek to resource a project to review the options to improve the presentation of information throughout gov.je.

A24 – M&D should consider creating and publishing a Service Design Manual and design system that prescribes minimum standards for presenting information on Government services through gov.je.

A25 – It is recommended that M&D and Communications identify support to review the content publishing process, including the role of the Communications unit, heads of business areas and the Web Services team, and consider a community of web editors to share best practice and develop skills.

Technical Infrastructure and Components

A26 – M&D to establish a project to review the options and assess the costs and implementation effort of a more modern technical framework for gov.je, including content management systems and front-end frameworks, which would provide the Government of Jersey with an online presence that meets the expectations of Islanders.

A27 – To ensure stability over the medium term the gov.je, statesassembly.gov.je and jerseylaw.je websites should be upgraded from SharePoint 2013 to the latest version (SharePoint 2019).

Data Publishing

A28 – To comply with generally accepted web accessibility standards, it is recommended that with the support of external input and business areas, M&D manages a project to review the current PDF documents used across gov.je and agree with the business owner a strategy to replace PDFs with HTML content, retain the PDF, or remove it.

A29 – It is recommended that all Government information is published through gov.je and that the domain policy is enforced.

A29.1 – It is proposed that a review is undertaken of all current domain names and a proposal made for each to retain it or migrate the information held under a domain to gov.je.

A30 – Government should commit to regularly reviewing gov.je against web accessibility standards and implement changes in the future to ensure it remains compliant.

A30.1 – M&D should develop a plan to implement the recommendations made in the 2022 accessibility audit.

7 - Provision of Policy and Communications Advice to Ministers

Introduction

The communications directorate of the Government of Jersey operates in a manner very similar to other developed democracies, including by adhering to protocols concerning output, advice and guidance, media handling, marketing campaigns, and corporate communications.

The directorate supports Ministers and senior officers in promoting their priorities, gaining feedback on potential initiatives, and supporting the effective delivery of public services. Internally among colleagues, the directorate communicates with employees to embed understanding of the Government's direction and key priorities in a way that motivates them to give of their best and achieve the outcomes desired by the Council of Ministers. It also supports leaders to communicate a clear vision and direction through targeted communications and engagement activities with senior managers.

Externally among Islanders, the directorate uses a campaign approach and relies on behavioural insights to inform, educate, and persuade Islanders so that their daily lives are enhanced by the Government, and their voices are heard by the elected Council of Ministers. It aims to increase the frequency and quality of engagements between Ministers and the media so that Islanders get to see and hear from their elected representatives as often as possible. The directorate also raises awareness of policies, services, and benefits beyond the legal and statutory requirements to make sure Islanders are properly informed about what the Government is doing and how they can access and benefit from new and existing services.

Additionally, the directorate seeks to positively influence attitudes and behaviours to benefit the health, wellbeing and financial prosperity of Islanders and informs, supports, and reassures them in times of crisis.

Where appropriate, it works to enhance the reputation of the Government at home and abroad.

A number of plans and key documents describe the provision of policy and communications advice to Ministers.

Areas for Improvement

Policy Development

• Making sure the directorate is involved in the policy writing process of key documents e.g. Government Plan, Common Strategic Priorities, and other key policy development. This would help with clarity and consistency of messaging for the public, particularly writing for public consumption

• Maintaining a project management system throughout the policy development cycle so that the directorate can promote key milestones with Islanders on the progress of policies or initiatives that have already been agreed.

Ministerial Support

• Providing key messages to Ministers on a consistent and regular basis so they are reminded of and understand their agreed Council of Ministers' position on key policy, initiatives, and programmes of work. Ministers can use these when engaging with the public and other stakeholders

• Developing deeper relationships between Heads of Communications and Ministers in order to communicate effectively and protect the reputation of Government

• Developing a joined-up approach to working between the Ministerial Support Unit (MSU), Communications, and Policy.

Strategic Messaging

Ensuring the golden thread of Common Strategic Priorities is communicated consistently in all communications, engagement activity, and campaigns.

Press Releases and Media Handling

Having reports quickly lined up in an accessible fashion so that they can be linked by M&D to press releases on gov.je.

Proposed Actions

Policy Development

A31 – Communications to work with SPPP and Ministers to plan, in advance, on how they are going to track, and then communicate, the progress of key policy developments, decisions and milestones to the public.

Ministerial Support

A32 – Heads of Communications to produce regular key messages' and reactive Q&A' documents for Ministers that support them in delivering clear, coherent and consistent messages to Islanders.

A33 – Director of Communications to research other jurisdictions and how they approach effectiveness of Ministerial Support Units, the Communications function, and Policy development in the staging of communication from development to publication.

A34 – MSU, Policy, and Communications to meet regularly to discuss upcoming initiatives, developments, diaries, and pipelines of work.

Strategic Messaging

A35 – Head of Strategic Communications to produce guidance on ensuring how Government priorities are communicated consistently in all communications, engagement activity, and campaigns.

Press Releases and Media Handling

A36 – Where press releases on gov.je refer to a published report the press release should include a link to the relevant documents to make them more readily available to Islanders. A37 – Head of Communications to produce 2023 Communications and Engagement strategies based on the Ministerial Plans to promote greater transparency and engagement from Ministers with the public on key priorities and programmes of work.

Annex A

Engagement and Information Improvement Project Board Terms of Reference

Document Purpose

• Outline the authority of the Engagement and Information Improvement Project Board (the Project Board')

• Set out the scope of the project and the schedule for its delivery

• Provide the membership of, and governance for, the Project Board.

Authority

The Project Board are tasked to ensure the successful delivery of the project in line with the agreed scope and delivery schedule which is set out below.

The Project Board will provide support to the Assistant Chief Minister, Deputy Stephenson in making informed decisions with respect to overall project direction as set out in Action 2 of the Council of Ministers' 100 Day Plan to "undertake a project to set out how Islanders can better engage with Government, what information is available and how we can improve". This includes decisions to sign off the agreed scope and delivery schedule for the project.

Any issue which cannot be resolved by the Project Board collectively will be escalated to the Chief Minister.

Project Scope

The Project Board will undertake a project to set out how Islanders can better engage with Government, what information is available and how we can improve. This project has two workstreams:

1 - Improve the Range and Accessibility of Data and Information Across Government

The Project Board will commission and oversee a review of the data and information which is currently available to Islanders, how this can be improved so that Islanders can find information for themselves.

The effective provision of information includes ensuring that it:

• Is accessible to all Islanders, including children and young people, older persons, minority and less heard groups

• Enables Islanders to understand the rationale for Government decisions.

This review will cover:

1. How information is presented to Islanders on the gov.je website, including the form and accessibility of the contents of the website

2. Ministerial papers - extent and nature of publication (papers, briefings, minutes, etc.)
3. The sufficiency and presentation, by both digital and analogue means, of public information relating to Government decisions, including the provision of information used to inform decisions that have been made
4. A process to audit what the Government has previously agreed to publish (e.g. revenue matters, social security matters, waiting lists, travel expenditure, etc.) whether this is still being published, and its accessibility on the gov.je website
5. The sufficiency and presentation of public information relating to Government consultations, including the groups and individuals which are targeted by, involved with, and have provided feedback to consultations
6. The sufficiency and presentation of statistical outputs by Government
7. The process to provide Ministers with clear access to policy and communications documentation and advice from policy initiation through to implementation.

The review will examine each of these areas and provide recommendations and options for improvement. The cost implications of each option will be set out under the review and provided to the Council of Ministers.

The Project Board will develop a programme for improvement to address the findings of the review for the consideration of the Council of Ministers. The Project Board will subsequently implement the programme for improvement as directed by the Council of Ministers.

This workstream will be delivered in accordance with the delivery schedule below.

2 - Better Engagement: The Policy Inclusion Framework

The Project Board will oversee and co-ordinate the development of a framework (the Policy Inclusion Framework') proposals for which will be outlined to the States Assembly by the end of September 2022 (as required by P.65/2022). This will include the structured participation and inclusion of the following groups, in particular, in policy development processes across the Government:

• Children and young people

• Older people

• Minority and less heard groups, including Islanders with disabilities, ethnic minorities and individuals for whom English is a second language.

The Policy Inclusion Framework will include guidance on:

• Scope – clear internal and external guidance on when/how to involve children, older people, Islanders with disabilities and health issues, minority and less heard groups in the development of policy

• Structure - who to involve from within those groups, the establishment of standing groups such as the Old Person's Living Forum and the development of criteria for whether to set up standing groups in the future

• Processes –a consistent set of methodologies that are easy to understand and to implement

• Products - the use of simple, short documents written in plain English; and when it would be appropriate to use non-English languages, as well as products for people with disabilities.

This workstream will be delivered in accordance with the delivery schedule.

Delivery Schedule

Each workstream will be delivered in accordance with this schedule.

1 - Improve the Range and Accessibility of Data and Information Across Government

The Director of Communications and Director of Statistics and Analytics will be accountable to the Project Board for delivering this workstream according to the timetable below.

2 - Better Engagement: The Policy Inclusion Framework

The Group Director of Policy will be accountable to the Project Board for delivering this workstream according to the timetable below.

Membership

The core membership of the Group will be supplemented by other members as and when the members believe their presence at a meeting or involvement in a particular matter will be of assistance.

Responsibilities

The Chair is responsible for oversight of the Project Board, ensuring that it delivers the project's objectives (set out in the project scope) in accordance with the agreed delivery schedule.

The Project Board will assign work arising to an appropriate officer. Any work which is assigned to members of the Project Board, or which a member of the Project Board agrees to undertake, must be delivered in accordance with the agreed timetable, set out in this document.

The Chair is responsible for presenting the Project Board's findings to the Chief Minister and for approving the publication and dissemination of documents relating to the Board's work.

Meetings

Meetings of the Project Board will ordinarily take place once every two weeks until 21 October 2022 and once per month thereafter until the Chair deems that the project has been completed. All members are expected to attend wherever possible. In the event of a member being unable to attend a meeting, a suitable replacement should be asked to attend instead.

Meetings will generally take place both in person and via Microsoft Teams. Responsibility for secretarial duties (the production of agendas, minutes and circulating relevant papers) will be performed by the Communications Unit, in conjunction with the Governance Policy Team in SPPP. The agenda and any associated papers should be circulated no less than one full working day before each meeting.

Information Sharing

There should be a free flow of information relevant to the Project Board's purpose between its members. It should be presumed that all documents shared between Project Board members are confidential unless otherwise agreed.

Freedom of information principles and legislation will apply to all documents and correspondence, which includes exemptions on the release of information relating to the formulation or development of policy proposals (Article 35 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011).

The Chair may decide to release information to the public, following consultation with the Board.

Annex B – How Other Jurisdictions Engage

The Policy Inclusion Framework has been developed following analysis of good practice in other jurisdictions, which also take a range of approaches to community engagement. Examples include engagement via the traditional media, social media, Government websites, drop in' sessions, newsletters, conferences, and public education programmes. Methods of engagement from elsewhere may be grouped into four broad categories.

Zero, or very little, engagement - some jurisdictions do not have a tradition of public consultation. This can be because they regard it as burdensome or a waste of time, or because they do not have a tradition of democracy. For example, about a third of the 138 countries that conducted consultations on economic regulations did not adopt consultative practices throughout the entire government.

Traditional democratic engagement – most governments engage with the public via online formal consultations, public meetings and occasional referenda. For example, in recent years Wales has conducted public consultations on numerous issues in the form of documents published by the Welsh government and public meetings relating to a vast array of regional and local issues. This is also the normal method by which third sector organisations consult.

Moderate innovations and adaptations in democratic engagement – this includes citizens' juries and citizen's assemblies, which have recently been implemented in Jersey. Wales has also used a citizens' jury to determine what individuals care about in terms of social care, while Germany has some 120 standing citizens' assemblies and citizens' juries which focus on a wide range of issues. In these cases, participants are randomly selected, paid and given care allowances where necessary. Other methods employed by modern democracies include drop-in sessions; newsletters and public education programmes; market research techniques (including paid engagement); online public meetings and social media.

Disruptive democratic engagement – this involves creative and collaborative means of engagement, including community panels (whereby the public are engaged in the selection and design of projects); experts by experience (consulting stakeholders who have lived experience' of an issue); community-engaged design (supporting groups who work closely with the community); inclusive by design' (devising innovative engagement methods such as a youth voice competition or parliamentary style debate); humble government' (where governments accept that they are fallible and work on consensus-building); and deliberative polling (ascertaining informed public opinion over a period of time to determine public policy). These methods, implemented by some UK local authorities such as Lambeth and Southwark, focus on inclusivity, community, innovation, consensus and transparency.

Annex C – Languages Spoken in Jersey

The Jersey Census does not collect information on languages spoken and English language proficiency. However, Statistics Jersey carry out the Children and Young Persons Survey every two years of children in Years 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 which includes questions on whether children and young people spoke English at home, which language they mostly spoke at home, and whether at least one of their parents/carers can read and write English. The latest survey was carried out in 2021:

Jersey Children and Young People's Survey 20220309 SJ.pdf (gov.je).

In 2021 about 5 percent of children and young people surveyed hardly ever/never' spoke English at home.

Of the young people surveyed who spoke English at home some of the time' or hardly ever/never', the largest proportion spoke Portuguese. 48 other' languages were reported; the most common other languages specified included Romanian, French, Spanish, Hindi and Thai.

Around 6% of young people reported living with adults who cannot read and write in English; a further 7% said that they did not know. Of those whose parents/carers could not read and write in English, the majority (81%) spoke Portuguese at home.

The above information from children and young persons does not give information on the ability of adults as a whole in Jersey to speak and read English, as it will not cover adults without children, or with children who were not in the years selected for the 2021 Children and Young Persons Survey. However, given the very high response rate (85%) to this survey, it will be a good proxy for the information of interest, and is the best information available.

Annex D – Example Open Datasets

Examples of datasets that use this publishing process include:

Examples of data uploads include:

Examples of data visuals without open data include: